Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
CT-guided 125I brachytherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma in high-risk locations after transarterial chemoembolization combined with microwave ablation: a propensity score-matched study Cover

CT-guided 125I brachytherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma in high-risk locations after transarterial chemoembolization combined with microwave ablation: a propensity score-matched study

Open Access
|Mar 2023

Figures & Tables

Figure 1

Patient flow diagram.

TACE = transarterial chemoembolization; MWA = microwave ablation

Table 1

Baseline patient characteristics before and after propensity score-matched

ParameterTotal (N = 181)Total cohortPSM cohort
Group AGroup BPGroup AGroup BP
N = 49N = 132valueN = 49N = 98value
Sex0.370.751
Male162 (89.5%)46 (93.9%)116 (87.9%)46 (93.9%)89 (90.8%)
Female19 (10.5%)3 (6.12%)16 (12.1%)3 (6.12%)9 (9.18%)
Age (y)56.0 [47.0;64.0]56.0 [47.0;68.0]55.5 [48.0;62.0]0.42556.0 [47.0;68.0]55.0 [48.0;62.0]0.468
BCLC0.041*1
B72 (39.8%)13 (26.5%)59 (44.7%)13 (26.5%)26 (26.5%)
C109 (60.2%)36 (73.5%)73 (55.3%)36 (73.5%)72 (73.5%)
Maximum median (IQR), tumor mm diameter,29.0 [18.0;49.0]36.0 [22.0;53.0]26.5 [18.0;46.0]0.039*36.0 [22.0;53.0]31.0 [18.0;57.8]0.579
Tumor number0.9270.66
1-260 (33.1%)17 (34.7%)43 (32.6%)17 (34.7%)29 (29.6%)
≥ 3121 (66.9%)32 (65.3%)89 (67.4%)32 (65.3%)69 (70.4%)
PVTT0.2021
None108 (59.7%)25 (51.0%)83 (62.9%)25 (51.0%)49 (50.0%)
Yes73 (40.3%)24 (49.0%)49 (37.1%)24 (49.0%)49 (50.0%)
Distant metastasis0.1710.953
None109 (60.2%)25 (51.0%)84 (63.6%)25 (51.0%)52 (53.1%)
Yes72 (39.8%)24 (49.0%)48 (36.4%)24 (49.0%)46 (46.9%)
High risk location0.045*0.76
198 (54.2%)33 (67.3%)65 (49.2%)33 (67.3%)62 (63.3%)
283 (45.8%)16 (32.7%)67 (50.8%)16 (32.7%)36 (36.7%)
TACE sessions2.00 [1.00;3.00]2.00 [1.00;2.00]2.00 [1.00;3.00]0.4422.00 [1.00;2.00]1.00 [1.00;3.00]0.464
MWA sessions1.00 [0.00;2.00]1.00 [0.00;2.00]1.00 [0.00;2.00]0.1621.00 [0.00;2.00]1.00 [0.00;2.00]0.31
Cause of liver disease:0.090.181
Continued
HCV/HBV169 (93.4%)43 (87.8%)126 (95.5%)43 (87.8%)93 (94.9%)
Other12 (6.6%)6 (12.2%)6 (4.55%)6 (12.2%)5 (5.10%)
ECOG score0.1890.669
0126 (69.6%)30 (61.2%)96 (72.7%)30 (61.2%)65 (66.3%)
155 (30.4%)19 (38.8%)36 (27.3%)19 (38.8%)33 (33.7%)
Child-pugh score0.5630.386
A82 (45.3%)46 (93.9%)36 (27.3%)46 (93.9%)86 (87.8%)
B99 (54.7%)3 (6.12%)96 (72.7%)3 (6.12%)12 (12.2%)
AFP, ng/mL0.8110.576
< 400125 (69.1%)35 (71.4%)90 (68.2%)35 (71.4%)64 (65.3%)
≥ 40056 (30.9%)14 (28.6%)42 (31.8%)14 (28.6%)34 (34.7%)
PT (s)12.2 [11.5;13.1]12.0 [11.5;12.8]12.3 [11.6;13.1]0.16712.0 [11.5;12.8]12.2 [11.5;13.1]0.331
ALB (g/L)40.35 [36.2;43.9]40.8 [36.7;44.1]40.2 [36.0;43.9]0.32940.8 [36.7;44.1]40.3 [36.1;44.1]0.518
TBIL (mg/dL)13.55 [10.1;19.32]12.3 [8.73;18.2]14.6 [10.4;20.4]0.16712.3 [8.73;18.2]14.6 [10.1;20.2]0.227

[i] AFP = alpha fetoprotein; ALB = albumin; BCLC = Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer; ECOG = Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; IQR = interquartile range; MWA = microwave ablation; PSM = propensity score-matched; PVTT = portal vein tumor thrombosis; PT = prothrombin time; TACE = transcatheter arterial chemoembolization; TBIL = total bilirubin

SI conversion factors: To convert albumin to grams per liter, multiply by 10.0; to convert bilirubin to micromoles per liter, multiply by 17.104; and to convert α-fetoprotein to micrograms per liter, multiply by 1.0.

*p value ≤ 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance.

Table 2

Intrahepatic and high-risk locations tumor responses in the two groups after propensity score matching (PSM)

Tumor responseIntrahepatic TumorTumor in high-risk locations
Group A (n = 49)Group B (n = 98)P valueGroup A (n = 49)Group B (n = 98)P value
Complete response (CR)4659
Partial response (PR)21232829
Stable disease (SD)17411340
Progressive disease (PD)728320
Objective response rate (ORR) (%)51.0%29.6%0.011†*67.3%38.8%< 0.001†*
Disease control rate (DCR) (%)85.7%71.4%0.055†93.9%79.6%0.025†*

[i] † Pearson χ2 test was used

* p value ≤ 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance.

Figure 2

Kaplan-Meier curves comparing progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival overall survival (OS) from different groups. (A) Cumulative PFS between the unmatched A and B groups. (B) Cumulative PFS between the matched A and B groups. (C) Cumulative OS between the unmatched A and B groups. (D) Cumulative OS between the matched A and B groups.

Table 3

Multivariate analyses of predictors of progression-free survival after treatment

Risk FactorUnivariateMultivariate
HR95%CIP valueHR95%CIP value
Sex
Female1
Male0.7550.393–1.4510.399
Age (y)
< 601
≥ 601.0930.761–1.5690.63
Maximum diameter (tumor mm)1.0061.000–1.0130.071*1.0030.996-1.0100.458
Tumor number
1-21
≥ 31.1040.915–1.3320.302
BCLC stage
B1
C1.3950.929–2.0950.109
High-risk location
11
20.6650.456–0.9700.034**0.8460.550-1.3020.447
PVTT
None
Yes1.6151.124–2.3190.010**1.6251.015-2.5460.040**
Distant metastasis
None
Yes1.0990.772–1.5650.602
TACE sessions1.0620.964–1.1700.223
MWA sessions1.0060.914–1.1060.905
Treatment
TACE+MWA1
TACE+MWA+ 125I0.5270.357–0.7780.002**0.4790.328-0.733<0.001**
Cause of liver disease
Other1
HBV/HCV1.360.662–2.7910.402
ECOG score
01
11.2690.876–1.8370.208
AFP
≤ 400 ng/mL1
Continued
> 400 ng/mL1.721.164–2.5420.006**1.4030.948-2.1290.090
Prothrombin time (s)0.9420.827–1.0730.367
Albumin (g/L)0.9870.951–1.0240.477
Continued
Total Bilirubin (μmol/L)1.0010.995–1.0080.649
Child-pugh class
A1
B1.2160.654–2.2630.536

[i] AFP = alpha fetoprotein; ALB = albumin; BCLC = Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer; ECOG = Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; HR = hazard ratio; MWA = microwave ablation; PVTT = portal vein tumor thrombosis; PT = prothrombin time; TACE = transarterial chemoembolization; TBIL = total bilirubin

*P value ≤ 0.1 in uni,variate were included in multivariate analysis, **P value ≤ 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance in multivariate analysis

Figure 3

Kaplan-Meier curves comparing progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) according to the statistically significant prognostic factors in the multivariate analysis after propensity score-match. (A) Cumulative PFS between portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT) and None-PVTT patients. (B). Cumulative OS between male and female. (C) Cumulative OS between Barcelona clinic liver cancer (BCLC) B and C stages patients.

Figure 4

Subgroup analyses revealed by Kaplan-Meier curves comparing progression-free survival (PFS). (A) Comparison of the PFS between portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT) and None-PVTT patients in group B. (B) Comparison of the PFS between PVTT and None-PVTT patients in group A. (C) Comparison of the PFS between group A and B in patients with PVTT. (D) Comparison of the PFS between group A and B in none-PVTT patients. (E) Comparison of the PFS between group A and B in high-risk location 1. (F) Comparison of the PFS between group A and B in high-risk location 2.

Table 4

Complications related to the procedure

123-4123-4
Fever3300391000.608‡
Nausea5320591100.852†
Diarrhea321035501‡
Pain required treatment13103013394200.007†*
Liver abscess000001101‡
Puncture hemorrhage110015800.274‡
Displacement of seeds00000----
RILD00000----

[i] AE = adverse effects; RILD = radiation-induced liver disease

† Pearson χ2 test was used; ‡ Continuity correction was used

*p value ≤ 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/raon-2023-0012 | Journal eISSN: 1581-3207 | Journal ISSN: 1318-2099
Language: English
Page range: 127 - 139
Submitted on: Dec 29, 2022
Accepted on: Jan 30, 2023
Published on: Mar 22, 2023
Published by: Association of Radiology and Oncology
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

© 2023 Zixiong Chen, Xiaobo Fu, Zhenkang Qiu, Maoyuan Mu, Weiwei Jiang, Guisong Wang, Zhihui Zhong, Han Qi, Fei Gao, published by Association of Radiology and Oncology
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.